Fallout from Japanese Disaster Not Only Nuclear

Brandon Sun “Small
World” Column, Sunday, April 3 / 11Zack
Gross

The
recent and on-going triple disaster of earthquake, tsunami and nuclear
meltdown in Japan has raised many questions – not all of them new –
about vulnerability of the poor, preparedness of communities and
nations, causes of the current spate of natural disasters, and fear in
the minds of people about the future.

It seems that this latest tragedy is not just a mess that needs to be cleaned up. Deeper questions are being raised.

Even
in Japan, where preparation for natural disaster is considered a
national priority, recent events have led to the death and
disappearance of almost 20,000 people and set the country back, in
terms of infrastructure and economic recovery, at hundreds of billions
of dollars.

Anger has been generated at the company running the nuclear plants and at the government and its response to what has happened.

The
President of Ethiopia, Girma Wolde-Giogis, leader of a country prone to
all manner of disaster – drought, conflict, disease and more –
cautioned after the Japan quake that disaster has an even greater
impact on poor and “under-developed” countries.

Speaking
at an international event on disaster risk reduction and climate
change, he called upon participants to focus on prevention, including
examining and acting upon our rich Western lifestyle, enhancing our
cooperation in global poverty alleviation programs, and facing head-on
issues related to climate change.

A particular concern
exists for Asia where it is estimated that 85% of natural
disaster-related casualties occur. Since 2004, there have been
major and frequent disasters in the Philippines, Pakistan, India, Sri
Lanka, Indonesia, Burma, China and elsewhere on that continent. A
global risk assessment company puts Bangladesh, Indonesia, Iran and
Pakistan in the “extreme” category.

Not only does this
company’s tracking show where vulnerabilities exist, but also that risk
of natural disaster around the world is growing. The high number
of 85% speaks to the size of Asia, the number of disasters, population
density, poor engineering standards, weak preparedness (maybe not in
Japan) and poverty. In particular, with poverty, those who can
afford to own land occupy the highest available and are therefore less
vulnerable to flooding.

A number of scientists have spoken out
since the Japanese earthquake and tsunami to tie climate change into
the sharp growth in the number of these natural disasters.

It
has long been understood that climate change contributes to extreme and
unpredictable weather. The extreme heat felt in Europe in recent
summers, the massive storms and tornadoes in the United States, the
widening deserts in Africa are just some examples of this.

One
cause of tsunamis, described by William McGuire, a professor at
University College, London, is: “that the on-going rise in global
average temperatures may already be eliciting a hazardous response from
the geosphere. When ice is lost, the earth’s crust bounces back
up again and that triggers earthquakes, which trigger submarine
landslides, which cause tsunamis.”

Another response to recent natural disasters comes from the United States and its fundamentalist Christian constituency.

Polls
show that just over half of Americans (56%) believe that God is in
control of all that happens on earth and that almost as many (44%)
believe that the disaster in Japan is a sign from God of “end times.”
University of Toronto sociologist Scott Schiemann explains that there
is a widespread human urge to “turn to God” for an explanation of any
major disaster.

Thus, two-thirds of white American evangelicals
believe that the Japan disaster is a message from a deity and one-third
feel that God punishes an entire nations for the sins of a
few.

Schiemann believes that natural disasters
make people feel much less in control of their lives and therefore
liable to identify “someone” else who has that control. Of
course, people who strongly believe in an active God may have less of a
feeling of control over their lives anyway.

Either way,
the idea that “end of times” or “control by a deity” is behind all of
the recent disasters is a simplistic view of causality and actually
takes away responsibility that we should feel for current changes in
our world.

Not only must we, humanity, be more able to respond to these situations, but we must also work harder at prevention.